4 ms·

I think we’re going to come to consider these things normal and mundane. Anyone can see you fake naked at any time. Meh who cares. Anyone can put you in any r

by Swizec 9y ago

I think we’re going to come to consider these things normal and mundane. Anyone can see you fake naked at any time. Meh who cares. Anyone can put you in any random video. Meh who cares. Anyone can ... meh We used to think it scandalous/offensive for someone to take photos of us. Now it’s just part of being outside. We don’t even think about the fact that everyone walka around with a camera.

neveroffensive 9y ago
> meh I think this is going to be the real answer for how we can best handle changes like this. So what if people can see a highly accurate computer simulation of you naked, we do the same things in our heads half the time anyways. Aside from the taboo, is there anything really fundamentally wrong with nudity?
djsumdog 9y ago
If it gets good enough that it becomes difficult to identify real security cam footage vs edited footage (which could be easier than you think considering the low quality/resolution of security cameras), there could be serious legal consequences. What if a suspect's lawyer plays the same CCTV video and shows the arresting officer committing the crime and says, "See. Anyone could have made this evidence." You'd then have to prove chain of custody and it can get incredibly hairy .. but only if you're rich and famous enough to hire those lawyers and make that argument.
- smallnamespace 9y ago
  We're going to need to digitally sign everything at the time of production to prove to they're not forgeries then.
  - na85 9y ago
    We already have the capability to do special effects and superposition in real time. My phone can do it with simple shapes in snapchat already, including with proper perspective and depth scaling. Imagine what will be possible in even 5 years with good hardware. Deep fakes in real time, digitally signed.
    - smallnamespace 9y ago
      I'd imagine that the ability to fake and tell apart fakes will scale with computational resources, and so we will also have progressively stronger signatures that cost more computational power to generate. This is basically already the premise of PoW -- it's hard to fake out the network and the chain of hashes show you exactly how much computational work was put into demonstrating veracity. This doesn't remove the ability to fake things, but it imposes a price. If you really want to show something is real, dump a bunch of computation into computing hashes.
- Swizec 9y ago
  Exactly. I think we're going to stop using video as evidence of anything.
intended 9y ago
Only if you are in the first world and even then if you are some subgroup of people. I know of and read about people commuting suicide or being killed because their honor was harmed. This is not meh for many billions of people.
- Swizec 9y ago
  > This is not meh for many billions of people. I agree. It’s not meh for many people. I think that the more common it becomes, the more social mores are going to change to accomodate it. Once upon a time dressing like people do today was scandalous now it’s not. You know, like wearing a straw hat too late in the year leading to riots. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_Hat_Riot https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_Hat_Riot

by Swizec 9y ago

neveroffensive 9y ago

> meh I think this is going to be the real answer for how we can best handle changes like this. So what if people can see a highly accurate computer simulation of you naked, we do the same things in our heads half the time anyways. Aside from the taboo, is there anything really fundamentally wrong with nudity?

djsumdog 9y ago

If it gets good enough that it becomes difficult to identify real security cam footage vs edited footage (which could be easier than you think considering the low quality/resolution of security cameras), there could be serious legal consequences. What if a suspect's lawyer plays the same CCTV video and shows the arresting officer committing the crime and says, "See. Anyone could have made this evidence." You'd then have to prove chain of custody and it can get incredibly hairy .. but only if you're rich and famous enough to hire those lawyers and make that argument.

smallnamespace 9y ago
We're going to need to digitally sign everything at the time of production to prove to they're not forgeries then.
- na85 9y ago
  We already have the capability to do special effects and superposition in real time. My phone can do it with simple shapes in snapchat already, including with proper perspective and depth scaling. Imagine what will be possible in even 5 years with good hardware. Deep fakes in real time, digitally signed.
  - smallnamespace 9y ago
    I'd imagine that the ability to fake and tell apart fakes will scale with computational resources, and so we will also have progressively stronger signatures that cost more computational power to generate. This is basically already the premise of PoW -- it's hard to fake out the network and the chain of hashes show you exactly how much computational work was put into demonstrating veracity. This doesn't remove the ability to fake things, but it imposes a price. If you really want to show something is real, dump a bunch of computation into computing hashes.
Swizec 9y ago
Exactly. I think we're going to stop using video as evidence of anything.

intended 9y ago

Only if you are in the first world and even then if you are some subgroup of people. I know of and read about people commuting suicide or being killed because their honor was harmed. This is not meh for many billions of people.

Swizec 9y ago
> This is not meh for many billions of people. I agree. It’s not meh for many people. I think that the more common it becomes, the more social mores are going to change to accomodate it. Once upon a time dressing like people do today was scandalous now it’s not. You know, like wearing a straw hat too late in the year leading to riots. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_Hat_Riot https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_Hat_Riot